Coronary interventions

A randomised comparison of coronary stents according to short or prolonged durations of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a pre-specified analysis of the SMART-DATE trial

EuroIntervention 2021;17:411-417. DOI: 10.4244/EIJ-D-20-00556

Woo Jang
Woo Jin Jang1, MD; Jin Bae Lee2, MD; Young Bin Song3, MD; Ki Hong Choi3, MD; Seung-Hyuk Choi3, MD; Woo Jung Chun4, MD; Ju Hyeon Oh4, MD; Ik Hyun Park4, MD; Joon-Hyung Doh5, MD; Jin-Ok Jeong6, MD; Jong-Seon Park7, MD; Hyeon-Cheol Gwon3, MD; Joo-Yong Hahn3
1. Ewha Womans University College of Medicine, Seoul Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea; 2. Daegu Catholic University Medical Center, Daegu, Republic of Korea; 3. Heart Vascular Stroke Institute, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea; 4. Samsung Changwon Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Changwon, Republic of Korea; 5. Inje University Ilsan Paik Hospital, Goyang, Republic of Korea; 6. Chungnam National University Hospital, Daejeon, Republic of Korea; 7. Youngnam University Hospital, Daegu, Republic of Korea

Background: Data on direct comparison between various drug-eluting stents with short duration dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) are limited, especially in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

Aims: We sought to compare biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stents (BP-BES) with durable polymer everolimus-eluting (DP-EES) and zotarolimus-eluting stents (DP-ZES) in patients with ACS according to different durations of DAPT.

Methods: In the SMART-DATE trial, 2,712 patients with ACS underwent randomisation for allocation of DAPT (6 months [n=1,357] or 12 months or longer [n=1,355]) and type of stent (BP-BES [n=901]), DP-EES [n=904], or DP-ZES [n=907]). The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis.

Results: At 18 months, the primary endpoint was attained by 2.6% with BP-BES, 2.0% with DP-EES, and 2.1% with DP-ZES (HR 1.29, 95% CI: 0.70-2.39, p=0.42 for BP-BES vs DP-EES and HR 1.23, 95% CI: 0.67-2.26, p=0.50 for BP-BES vs DP-ZES). The treatment effect of BP-BES for the primary endpoint was consistent among patients receiving 6-month DAPT as well as those receiving 12-month or longer DAPT (BP-BES vs. DP-EES, pinteraction=0.48 and BP-BES vs DP-ZES, pinteraction=0.87). After excluding 179 patients (101 in the BP-BES group) who did not receive allocated DES, the per-protocol analysis showed similar results.

Conclusions: The risk of a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis was not significantly different between patients receiving BP-BES versus DP-EES or DP-ZES across a short or prolonged duration of DAPT after ACS.

Sign in to read and download the full article

Forgot your password?

No account yet?
Sign up for free!

Create my pcr account

Join us for free and access thousands of articles from EuroIntervention, as well as presentations, videos, cases from

acs/nste-acsadjunctive pharmacotherapydrug-eluting stent
Coronary interventionsSTEMINSTEMIStents and scaffolds
Read next article
Culprit lesion location and outcomes in patients with multivessel disease and infarct-related cardiogenic shock: a core laboratory analysis of the CULPRIT-SHOCK trial

Latest news